mattvan1 wrote:I'm fairly certain our founding fathers would weep knowing how the 2nd Amendment has been corrupted and twisted into a defense for the indefensible, and yet if we begin to allow the federal government to chip away at the Bill of Rights then where is the line ultimately drawn?

matt can you expound on exactly how the 2nd has been corrupted and twisted, and into a defense of the indefensible?

Yes, but I don't feel like spending too much time on it. The abridged version - The origin of the 2nd Amendment was actually the English Bill of Rights written in the 1600's or so (going from memory here) Before the American revolution a militia was raised - as there was not a police force. This militia was comprised of those loyal to the Crown as well as those opposed to British rule. As tensions grew the loyalists were, under law, permitted to disarm the general population. The colonists refused, banded together, floundered around for a while then finally found a good battlefield general and the rest, as they say, is history.

So the origin of the law is clear, and the SCOTUS has ruled, over time, that those rights extend to the individual. All of this is fine - hunters, sportsmen, those who want to defend their home and property - all good.

But, as with everything, the fringe elements carry everything too far. And then morons like Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, drop incendiary little bombs like this one

"Gun control supporters have the blood of little children on their hands. Federal and state laws combined to insure that no teacher, no administrator, no adult had a gun at the Newtown school where the children were murdered. This tragedy underscores the urgency of getting rid of gun bans in school zones. The only thing accomplished by gun free zones is to insure that mass murderers can slay more before they are finally confronted by someone with a gun."

WTF, over? Stop hiding behind a law that you don't understand and stop trying to turn every citizen into a vigilante.

I don't need to be patient, they're going to be shit forever. - CDT, discussing my favorite NFL team

e0y2e3 wrote:There have been multiple references to the 2nd Amendment being vital due to it protecting us from our gov't in this thread.

The fact that said example is 100% untrue at this point is important to accept when discussing this outdated shitty amendmentment.

Right now guns are used for paranoid people to protect themselves and for people to feel like they have a big cock at shooting ranges. They entire militia concept that spawned the 2nd Amendment is dead.

The same logic can be applied to government intrusion upon our privacy, there's nothing we can do to stop them from accessing our private info. So in turn all applicable rights of privacy are outdated and in need of complete overhaul.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

I think one of the problems in this whole thing is that we are dealing in such hypothetical arguments most of the time, and particularly if you have a weapon and speak as I did above.

Is there a good chance that we'll have an armed takeover of the United States? Ehhh probably not, but we want to prepare as if there is one. I am not refuting my argument I just can't see myself being involved that much in either Pratt's group or the NRA.

Also let's not forget that probably close to half the Americans LOVE the police state. To them the Patriot Act, the warrantless wiretapping, the local police force playing dress up like it's a Nazi invasion for a parade....That is all progress to them after all they don't break the law. They see more protection everywhere you look as a good thing, and tend not to delve into these hypothetical questions about why the corrupt Republicrats are chipping away at the Bill of Rights.

I can speak only for myself, but I think I've been pretty clear on me owning shotguns, a rifle or two and a 5-shot revolver have nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. And that 5-shot revolver, even if I stick down my pants, doesn't do much to make my dick look bigger.

I have them because I hunt, use them and I enjoy them.

So what else in my house is dangerous that you don't think I should have, Lee? Personally, I think the dick comment brings to light the biggest issue. Too many stupid people reproducing and not having the time or inclination to actually be parents.

FUDU wrote:The same logic can be applied to government intrusion upon our privacy, there's nothing we can do to stop them from accessing our private info. So in turn all applicable rights of privacy are outdated and in need of complete overhaul.

If the 2nd amendment is outdated, isn't that really where we are headed anyway?

e0y2e3 wrote:Having shotguns and a five shot revolver doesn't make you one of the small dick people that gets their rocks off going to the range to shoot their big semi-auto rifle every weekend.

And the fact that you can at least see the difference between the 2nd amendment and what you do puts you fairly far ahead of the typical gun owning moron.

But that won't be any solace when it's taken away.

And look, if it was taken away WTF am I going to do? Nothing. There's not much I could do. Not actually much I'd be willing to do. You won't find me clutching that shotgun or revolver in a bloody "You can pry my gun from my cold dead hands..." t-shirt, riddled with police or military bullet holes.

I'm just saying you also have to consider the more paranoid among us believing (with a certain amount of legitimacy) that one thing leads to another and before you know it it's 1984.

I don't particularly prescribe to that level of paranoia, but because others do (and therefore differ from my POV) doesn't necessarily (and I stress NECESSARILY) mean they're crazy or wrong.

One: no amount of arming this nation is going to give them a snowballs chance in hell against this army

Two: if people want to cite their truther bullshit and start in on 1984 being a reality then fine, just accept that their paranoia is keeping this nation in a dark ages existence where we lead the industrialized world in gun ownership, murder rate and our kids are now getting picked off in safe white suburbs. If paranoia is more important that correcting the real issues then the future here is grim enough that people deserve the blood created by their ridiculousness.

e0y2e3 wrote:Having shotguns and a five shot revolver doesn't make you one of the small dick people that gets their rocks off going to the range to shoot their big semi-auto rifle every weekend.

And the fact that you can at least see the difference between the 2nd amendment and what you do puts you fairly far ahead of the typical gun owning moron.

But that won't be any solace when it's taken away.

And look, if it was taken away WTF am I going to do? Nothing. There's not much I could do. Not actually much I'd be willing to do. You won't find me clutching that shotgun or revolver in a bloody "You can pry my gun from my cold dead hands..." t-shirt, riddled with police or military bullet holes.

I'm just saying you also have to consider the more paranoid among us believing (with a certain amount of legitimacy) that one thing leads to another and before you know it it's 1984.

I don't particularly prescribe to that level of paranoia, but because others do (and therefore differ from my POV) doesn't necessarily (and I stress NECESSARILY) mean they're crazy or wrong.

And in my case I tend to take the hypothetical to extreme even when I don't really believe the boogeyman is around the corner, I am suspicious. Shoot (no pun intended) I don't even have anything. I mean shit my son is 18 and hasn't shot a weapon if anything I feel I've deprived the kid.

e0y2e3 wrote:One: no amount of arming this nation is going to give them a snowballs chance in hell against this army

Two: if people want to cite their truther bullshit and start in on 1984 being a reality then fine, just accept that their paranoia is keeping this nation in a dark ages existence where we lead the industrialized world in gun ownership, murder rate and our kids are now getting picked off in safe white suburbs. If paranoia is more important that correcting the real issues then the future here is grim enough that people deserve the blood created by their ridiculousness.

One: I agree. To disagree would be completely ridiculous.

Two: You may be right. But it's a sizeable, voting bloc and some slime ball politician will pander to their votes.

If you could take my stuff away and tell me no more kids will die and no more twisted fucks will call firefighters to a fire they set so they have target practice served up I'd run my stuff to the melt down facility today. Right now.

But that's not the case and I guess I ultimately come down on the side that says illegalizing something simply isn't going to make it go away. You could take away everything I have in terms of firearms and take away the firearms of every responsible, law abiding citizen who owns them and uses them and I believe you'll still have a gun issue.

I don't know what the answer is. Maybe you're right and removing the right to carry them is the first step. But I'm not convinced it is and I'm not convinced that's where it would end either. I don't stay up at night worrying about a police state and I barely give it any thought at all. But where does it end? Does it embolden politicians and governemnet to take another step somewhere down the line?

FUDU wrote:The other problem is not recognizing that the typical gun owner doesn't shoot up schools let alone anyone, nor do they own the type of gun associated with the military.

When the NRA "type" realizes a majority of the gun control crowd are more in line with what Peeker is suggesting than complete removal of all guns the discussion is going to be able to advance. When one side draws a line, the only way to make progress is for the other side to go as far to the opposite side of that line as possible.

"The best way to stop a bad man with a gun is to have a good guy with a gun" leads to comments like, "The best way to stop a bad man with a gun is to not let a bad man have a gun". Neither comment is real. Or helpful. But that is where we are and where we will remain as long as the side "with the rights" remains so staunch.

mattvan1 wrote:Yes, but I don't feel like spending too much time on it. The abridged version - The origin of the 2nd Amendment was actually the English Bill of Rights written in the 1600's or so (going from memory here) Before the American revolution a militia was raised - as there was not a police force. This militia was comprised of those loyal to the Crown as well as those opposed to British rule. As tensions grew the loyalists were, under law, permitted to disarm the general population. The colonists refused, banded together, floundered around for a while then finally found a good battlefield general and the rest, as they say, is history.

So the origin of the law is clear, and the SCOTUS has ruled, over time, that those rights extend to the individual. All of this is fine - hunters, sportsmen, those who want to defend their home and property - all good.

But, as with everything, the fringe elements carry everything too far. And then morons like Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, drop incendiary little bombs like this one

"Gun control supporters have the blood of little children on their hands. Federal and state laws combined to insure that no teacher, no administrator, no adult had a gun at the Newtown school where the children were murdered. This tragedy underscores the urgency of getting rid of gun bans in school zones. The only thing accomplished by gun free zones is to insure that mass murderers can slay more before they are finally confronted by someone with a gun."

WTF, over? Stop hiding behind a law that you don't understand and stop trying to turn every citizen into a vigilante.

matt that is why it is important to recognize the fringe element, and allow those who are more reasoned to join and even lead the discussion.

The most surprising thing to me in short term wake of the Newtown shooting was the attitudes and approach of parents that I've been around at a couple of large functions and assemblies. I expected this to be a topic for a few people while waiting for the events of the night to unfold, but most people were talking about it and the overwhelming majority of parents were not demanding to get the guns off the streets. It really shocked me, I expected the total opposite regardless of their responses being knee jerk or emotionally vested as parents.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

End of the day: I believe I have the right to hunt and to protect myself and my family in my home/car/etc and that if I choose to do so with a legally purchased sidearm with the proper licensing and training I should maintain that right.

But I also understand and agree with those who say the gun culture has got to change. It has got to be fixed. One week after Newton, in the mail, I got a flier from Great Lakes Outdoor Supply. Sales on tree satands, bows, Taurus .380's and Rugers, ammo, boots, knives, binocs, the whole deal.

And a sae on the Bushmaster AR-15. I know what those are, I know what they do. But I went to that store and there were people lined up to see and buy that gun for a grand. They came and left in cars worth less than the gun. They came and left in cars worth more than my house.

But there is simply and absolutely no NEED for that gun. I understand it's cool and it's a fine piece of equipment and manufacturing. But there is zero need for that weapon in the hands of non-military or police personnel. You don't hunt with it. You don't keep it in the drawer next to you for home safety. You don't carry in a hip holster or shoulder holster while working in a bad area.

There's no need for someone to have it any more than there's a need for someone to have a grenade launcher or bazooka for carrying/hunting/home protection.

None.

Now, that wouldn't have brought dead kids back in Chardon and it wouldn't bring dead kids back in Newton or in many other places. I get that. But start somewhere reasonable and educate from there.

That's my line in the sand. That's a weapon I'd be fine with removing from people along with beginning some type of far more structured and comprehensive CCW classes and even hunting safety courses. Like I said before. You want to get someone to your side of the room you have to get them one step closer first.

For the most part I am inline with you peeker, but I recognize the issue some might have with getting around your thoughts that b/c there might not be a need for such a weapon, people still have the right to one. I mean let's face it, there are an awful lot of things in life we do not need, but not only do we still have them we rarely hear anybody saying we shouldn't.

IMO it gets to much more fundamental issues, one (and a big one) being personal responsibility.

It's a big enough elephant in the room to make it extremely difficult to get around.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:For the most part I am inline with you peeker, but I recognize the issue some might have with getting around your thoughts that b/c there might not be a need for such a weapon, people still have the right to one. I mean let's face it, there are an awful lot of things in life we do not need, but not only do we still have them we rarely hear anybody saying we shouldn't.

IMO it gets to much more fundamental issues, one (and a big one) being personal responsibility.

It's a big enough elephant in the room to make it extremely difficult to get around.

I know.

But we can do nothing and have these issues and attacks from both sides afterward. We can go all Japan and eliminate all weapons and gun rights or we can maybe do something that seems like not enough/too much to both sides. If both sides hate it I think we're on our way to moving the ball.

Here's a few questions for any side of the debate, if AR-15 types were legislated off the market (b/c you're a fool if you think manufacturing of them would be halted) say Jan 1, 2015 would anyone have a problem with the American people buying them in a frenzy like we do iphones and other items of such convenience and luxury? Would 2015 be soon enough for you? Would you be happy with a limit per buyer per transaction (if so what number)?

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FF&F is not selling AR-15s at the moment, at least what I was told by an associate while there today. He claims the manufacturers are being cautious right now not knowing what is in store in the short term. They're out of all 12ga tactical shotguns right now as well, but he said that is almost strictly a rush from the holidays, and more are coming in soon enough.

IIRC the death of KMart 20-25 years ago was taking guns off their shelves period, as they were the largest gun retailer in the US at the time, I heard this second hand so don't quote me on the accuracy.

Just saying for just sayin sake.

I do understand CDTs point about his AR, can't see how I would feel any different.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

I havenot disagreed with anything Peeker or CDT has said. Why are all target shooters big-dick wanna be's. Does this mean big city bespectaled metrosexuals who don't own weapons are the actual big weenuses? Asking as a non gun owner (but wanna be)

I picture my vicarious life as ey0 like one of these Kettle One commercials. Hot chicks dressed to the nines dudes all suited out. I take it Duck Dynasty is not on your PVR?

If you could legally buy a howitzer and had the means to do so would that make it any more a personal safety/CCW/hunting weapon

I don't use my AR for any of those things, it's strictly a target shooting gun.

There are people who legally own heavy ass weaponry, the process to do so is really extensive.

Why can't you legally buy a 50 cal SAW and wouldn't that be fun to have?

Yeah, that would be fun to have, but I don't think a .50 cal SAW exists. The only SAW I know of is the .223/5.56 M-249.

Where is your line? Is it what someone determines is legal?

Do I need to have a line?

Sorry- Squad auto weapon.

I was daydreaming about the 50cal self-propelled mini rocket gun I was dreaming up to rabbit hunt.

Sit in the warm truck, take aim on the brush piles, let it loose, go pick up the chunks.

Perfect.

You don't have to have a line CDT. It's just a discussion fer fucksake. Although I guarantee when you see your kid for the first time, hold him, whatever, you'll find your lines. That definitely happens.

dmiles wrote:I havenot disagreed with anything Peeker or CDT has said. Why are all target shooters big-dick wanna be's. Does this mean big city bespectaled metrosexuals who don't own weapons are the actual big weenuses? Asking as a non gun owner (but wanna be)

I picture my vicarious life as ey0 like one of these Kettle One commercials. Hot chicks dressed to the nines dudes all suited out. I take it Duck Dynasty is not on your PVR?

It's an easy generalization that passively-aggressively minimizes the people who own guns. The issue with Lee using it is he doesn't (or shouldn't) have to. He's smart enough to engage in meaningful conversation and present an argument (abrasively as it may be made) that would be well thought out and likely convincing.

He'd make a tremendous lifelong psychological study

All kidding aside, I get what he's saying. I have a friends grew up with me doing all the things I do that graduated from Fordham, DePaul Law, etc and now live in NYC and Chicago respectively No desire to do what they did growing up as far as hunting, etc. More than enough to stimulate them where they are I guess.

Same for me where I am. More than enough to stimulate my interests and I have no desire to be anywhere near a big city. Different stimuli. No empathy from me for theirs nor them for mine.

dmiles wrote:I havenot disagreed with anything Peeker or CDT has said. Why are all target shooters big-dick wanna be's. Does this mean big city bespectaled metrosexuals who don't own weapons are the actual big weenuses? Asking as a non gun owner (but wanna be)

I picture my vicarious life as ey0 like one of these Kettle One commercials. Hot chicks dressed to the nines dudes all suited out. I take it Duck Dynasty is not on your PVR?

It's an easy generalization that passively-aggressively minimizes the people who own guns. The issue with Lee using it is he doesn't (or shouldn't) have to. He's smart enough to engage in meaningful conversation and present an argument (abrasively as it may be made) that would be well thought out and likely convincing.

He'd make a tremendous lifelong psychological study

All kidding aside, I get what he's saying. I have a friends grew up with me doing all the things I do that graduated from Fordham, DePaul Law, etc and now live in NYC and Chicago respectively No desire to do what they did growing up as far as hunting, etc. More than enough to stimulate them where they are I guess.

Same for me where I am. More than enough to stimulate my interests and I have no desire to be anywhere near a big city. Different stimuli. No empathy from me for theirs nor them for mine.

Stimulation is the key to getting by whether it's target shooting or hopping on the train to get to a cool hipster hangout. I try to be a step ahead of my bible-thumper friends, and my whacked out lib friends with the simple credo, that if you like doing ..... and ..... brings you some peace in this life (which isn't easy), then cool by me. Shoot, personally I can't stand country music but I don't think those who do are somehow at a lower IQ. I don't have a pickup, a gun, I don't watch Nascar, and never wear Camouflage, and I am certain nobody from any of those subsets would claim me. Truth is my sissy hands right now are much more like a prissy Chicago high rise boy, than rugged nature boy (though I do deadlift for fun).

In any case I still find you trying to stake out a reasonable middle ground, and perhaps I shouldn't have trolled so much assuming big brother is just around the corner to take away our guns.

And BP I agree that fear of despots taking control in a western democracy is probably going to happen but I also cannot get past my utter hatred for what has happened to human dignity and freedom in Cuba. If you say this will never happen in a western democracy, then I'll agree with you to a point, I just refuse to think it can't happen at all. The sad truth is if we ever get to that point we are probably fucked anyway because it means a bunch of screaming Murricans demanded and elected the very politicians who would further suppress liberty. Even right now, very few give two shits about the Patriot Act, or torture, or warrant-less wiretapping. In fact our pop-culture makes movies that celebrate "doing whatever it takes" to arrest the bad guy.

I havenot disagreed with anything Peeker or CDT has said. Why are all target shooters big-dick wanna be's. Does this mean big city bespectaled metrosexuals who don't own weapons are the actual big weenuses? Asking as a non gun owner (but wanna be)

I don't know where you got your impression of target shooters, from my experience, it couldn't be more backwards. The vast majority of other shooters I've met throughout the years have been nice and knowledgeable people. I've gone to the range and had people let me shoot guns I might never have had the chance to shoot (fucking BAR!).

Edit: And as a gun owner, I don't look down on anyone who choose not to own a firearm. It's a personal choice, either way.

Target shooting to me is challenging myself to get better and better.

Last edited by Cerebral_DownTime on Fri Dec 28, 2012 11:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

ou don't have to have a line CDT. It's just a discussion fer fucksake. Although I guarantee when you see your kid for the first time, hold him, whatever, you'll find your lines. That definitely happens.

Just wondering if you have 'em and what they are. Not poking.

No snark was intended. I just don't see the need for me to have a defined line on a subject with so much grey area.

One: no amount of arming this nation is going to give them a snowballs chance in hell against this army

Other than fringe nuts, who is suggesting they're going to fight the army?

The core principal, outdated or not, is that if our government becomes something it was not intended to be, an armed population has the means to remove it. And yes, I know our modern military has weapons that can vaporize a car from 30 miles....I would like to think that if the shit ever went down (It won't), the military would probably side with the people.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:The core principal, outdated or not, is that if our government becomes something it was not intended to be, an armed population has the means to remove it. And yes, I know our modern military has weapons that can vaporize a car from 30 miles....I would like to think that if the shit ever went down (It won't), the military would probably side with the people.

Exactly the point I made, previously.

"There is but one thing of real value: to cultivate truth and justice and to live without anger in the midst of lying and unjust men"

I've been to two large gun retailers in the past 36 hours. I found the clientele rather interesting. Mostly newer SUVs in the parking lot, some pick ups, quite a few mini vans and a few cars. Probably 45 potential customers in the store, of which 75% of which anyone of us would superficially label suburbanites and yuppie types, a few camouflage wearing hill jack looking type. All white with exception of 3 black males, and two of them had their kids with them (the only kids in the store) and those two guys were buying cross bows.

95% of every customer in the store was at or near the gun counter.

...and I didn't see any tobacco spitting.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:I've been to two large gun retailers in the past 36 hours. I found the clientele rather interesting. Mostly newer SUVs in the parking lot, some pick ups, quite a few mini vans and a few cars. Probably 45 potential customers in the store, of which 75% of which anyone of us would superficially label suburbanites and yuppie types, a few camouflage wearing hill jack looking type. All white with exception of 3 black males, and two of them had their kids with them (the only kids in the store) and those two guys were buying cross bows.

95% of every customer in the store was at or near the gun counter.

...and I didn't see any tobacco spitting.

Like I've said...every time there is talk of gun control Americans answer by flocking to gun stores...

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:My AR-15 was bought legally and I think i'll keep it. I'm not a criminal, I know how to handle the weapon, and i'm not going to be punished for the actions of others.

Unless the paycheck to give up my AR-15 is substantial. Otherwise...... it's mine.

...and unless it fires full auto and you paid $16,000.00 + for it, its not an assault weapon

You hear a lot of these gun ban people making claims about the AR-15, and how "easy" it is to convert it to full auto. They use the lightning link conversion as proof, failing to understand the link must be pre-NFA and it only costs around $7,000. Then they prattle about sears, never knowing what they're talking about of course. They believe I could walk to the gun store, buy a sear, and drop it into my semi-auto AR, bang, full auto.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I don't know where you got your impression of target shooters, from my experience, it couldn't be more backwards. The vast majority of other shooters I've met throughout the years have been nice and knowledgeable people. I've gone to the range and had people let me shoot guns I might never have had the chance to shoot (fucking BAR!).

Edit: And as a gun owner, I don't look down on anyone who choose not to own a firearm. It's a personal choice, either way.

Target shooting to me is challenging myself to get better and better.

No, I was simply referring to ey0's prior where target shooters were brought up. I work with a lot of guys (democrats many of them) who fire frequently and hit the target ranges and most of them are guys with masters degrees in engineering fields. Not exactly knuckle draggers.

A lot of people with Masters degrees need to feel like their manhood is adequate by fucking around on their wives, chain sawing shit and/or shooting guns. End of the day they still do these things to compensate for one inadequacy or another.

One: no amount of arming this nation is going to give them a snowballs chance in hell against this army

Other than fringe nuts, who is suggesting they're going to fight the army?[/quote]

Who says the army (as constituted) would actively be the government's tool of oppression? Prolly a bad comp, but the situation in Syria has similar elements. Seems a strawman to think members of our military, freshly trained in counter insurgency, would blindly follow a tinpot dictator and fire upon their brothers.

"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."

e0y2e3 wrote:A lot of people with Masters degrees need to feel like their manhood is adequate by fucking around on their wives, chain sawing shit and/or shooting guns. End of the day they still do these things to compensate for one inadequacy or another.

e0y2e3 wrote:A lot of people with Masters degrees need to feel like their manhood is adequate by fucking around on their wives, chain sawing shit and/or shooting guns. End of the day they still do these things to compensate for one inadequacy or another.

And some people ride mountain bikes, some spend multiple hours making sure their landscaping is perfect, some go ride Roller Coasters, some workout at MMA studios...

And I can appreciate dealing with stupid, we hired a kid out of UCF and he just can't keep up. And of course we are stuck with him until we prove 7 ways from Sunday that he can't do the work. HR---Ridiculous at times though I am sure there are reasons for being that careful.